BetterWithCheddar

I detect a bit of satire here, but also some truth. In my region, it's cold and dark for much of the school year. The Pack calendar ramps up in the Fall, we get outside for maybe 2 glorious Saturdays, then we settle into our routine of meeting 2x per month in the school cafeteria. Even though our council camp is equipped with a few nice, winterized cabins, few parents want to accept the liability of organizing a weekend outing. My son's Wolf Den tripled in size this year due to an influx of "indoor kids." These 2nd graders have tried team sports, realized they were already behind their peers, and opted for a more inclusive activity. They have a limited desire to go outside, but their parents said they can't be on the iPad all the time, so here they are. Most of these kids and their families are kind and decent. I'm glad Scouting exists to keep them active, but it's an odd dynamic. I think the shift to more indoor programming is at least partially guided by member preferences,

I could not agree more. I have yet to attend an overnight event with my 8-year-old Cub Scout. I don't think we'll attend our council's 3-day summer Cub camp either. The thought of being saddled with someone else's kids is overwhelming to me. I struggle to maintain order at Den meetings. 10% of the boys cause 90% of the problems and I don't want to be there when something really bad happens. For my son to get the most out of the program, I know I'll need to take a different approach when he joins a Scout Troop, but as of now - it's not worth the trouble IMHO. I really hate to admit it, but it's true.

Thanks to all who have provided feedback and support over the past 2.5 years as I've returned to Scouting as my son's Den Leader. I really enjoy the comradery of this message board. Happy Thanksgiving!

The fact that there is virtually no recourse for a falsely accused Scouter contributes to the BSA's current doom loop. A person could: A: Accept the conclusions, resign, and hope that's the end of it (it might not be). B: Appeal to the BSA's kangaroo court to clear their good name (with limited success and all while calling more attention to the situation). C; Mount a vigorous (and expensive) legal defense with a slightly higher probability of success (again, while calling more attention to the situation). I'm glad to be a leader as long as my son and his friends are having fun; however, once he's done, I can't see myself continuing to support the program in any way that involves direct contact with youth. For every bad actor, there is probably an equal number of awful families who wouldn't hesitate to jeopardize a volunteer's reputation over a perceived slight. Granted, I believe the vast majority of people in this world are good and decent ... but it only takes one.

This was my first thought. My wife and I see a local attorney every few years to revise our will and POA docs. We do OK professionally, but I'm not sure how many couples our age (~40) could afford basic legal services, much less be able to vigorously defend their reputations in court. A prominent venture capitalist once remarked (I'm paraphrasing): "Single digit millionaires don't have access to the legal system." He funded Hulk Hogan's successful civil suit against a tabloid magazine because he and Hulk Hogan (a single digit millionaire) shared a common enemy in the tabloid. Hulk Hogan, whose net worth had been reduced to "only" a few million after a divorce and other legal issues, could not afford to sue a tabloid without the backing of a billionaire who also had an axe to grind against the same tabloid. Good luck, Mr. Falsely-Accused Scouter.

Although I was a Boy Scout myself, my son is still in Cubs and my perspective these days is more from a Cub parent. We're fortunate to have a good group of parents running our Pack; however, there are many instances where I would go about things differently than other leaders (but settle for good enough). I understand the calculus changes a bit with Scout Troops. For now, the work is getting done and the kids are having fun, getting outside, exercising, socializing, etc. I'm not going nitpick my fellow volunteers. I'm just thankful for the support we do receive.

Respectfully, I feel like that enough parents with average skills could still put on a good program. The biggest problems occur when a small number of average leaders are over-burdened by a high number of drop-off parents and/or poorly behaved kids. I would settle for a culture of Very Good. If you have enough leaders/parents willing to take kids outside or plan a fun unit meeting, there is a good chance that your program can be sustained.

This definitely ranks up there with the top problems, but what are you doing to do? As much as we claim Scouting is a youth-driven program, we all know it's parent-driven. A program is only going to go as far as volunteers are willing to take it. As a Den Leader, I spend lots of invisible hours and dollars (my own money) to help the Pack. And I'm just one guy - we're fortunate to have a good group of parents that help with our program (but it can be exhausting). One of the reasons why travel sports have grown in popularity vs. Scouting is that they are less work for most parents. Sure, they cost 4x as much as Scouting, but I get to just show up and be a dad.

Since this is a Catholic-specific thread, I think it's important to also acknowledge that participation in organized religion has also decreased during the same time period. The number of self-identifying Catholic adults peaked in the US around 2005 at ~81 million. While there has not been a steep decline (there were still ~73 million self-identifying Catholic adults in 2023), church membership has not kept pace with population growth. Since churches have historically been big supporters of Scouting, this may help explain a portion of the membership decline. Fewer families going to church ---> Fewer kids in Scouting Faith Survey | American Catholic Statistics (1965-2021)

My district held its annual Fall Cub Day Camp yesterday. We're fortunate to have a great group of volunteers that put this event together every year. Best I can tell, it's staffed mostly by older adults whose children have long since aged out of the program and whose ties to local units have dissolved. We're also fortunate to have a DE that was an Eagle Scout in this same district and who makes everyone feel like the most important volunteer in the council, even though he himself is the one working long, odd hours for what I'm sure amounts to ~$15/hour. The Fall day camp is a great way to get Cubs outside before the crummy winter weather in our region limits our options. I was even able to piggy-back our monthly Wolf Den meeting onto the event and complete an Orienteering Adventure. The only downside: several activity stations were closed on short notice due to what our DE cited as "recent changes to the national guidelines for the operations of range and target activities." I'm not too familiar with the G2SS, but we were unable to have archery, slingshots, or paper rockets ~ all of which had been offered in previous years and were popular among Cubs and parents. This will hardly be a surprise to many forum members, but it feels like the national organization is making Scouting marginally safer at great expense to the program. Honestly, I was more concerned about someone catching a hook in the eye at the fishing station yesterday than I would have been about launching a homemade paper rocket using an air compressor operated by an adult.

I don't disagree, but most kids get 40+ hours of mixed gender interaction each week through school. I'm not sure a 1-hour, single-gender Scout meeting each week leads to unacceptable social norms. In fact, I think it may be complimentary in that it gives them a reprieve from constant social pressures. I'm not looking to re-hash old arguments. I've been generally supportive of the membership changes from the past decade. Coed Scouting works fine for Cubs and the Senior Scout programs; however, we're denying kids a development opportunity if we don't at least offer them the OPTION of single-gender Scout Troops. Middle school is rough.

My son's Pack held its first Pack Meeting on Tuesday. Officially, we had a kick-off and informational meeting in September, but this was the first one with a true program. We elected to cover the Bobcat Adventure in its entirety since it's required for all grades. In hindsight, this was a terrible idea. It felt like night school. To compound the issue, we had two failing Packs rolled into our own healthy Pack - this brought our total Scout Count from 45 to 85 and our leader count from 8 to 9. My son's Wolf den, which had averaged 6-7 kids during Lions and Tigers, now stands at 20. Mercifully, one of the new parents offered to assist in an unofficial capacity.

Scouts: "We promote conservation." Also Scouts: 'If we sell this camp, we can put in new toilets at our other camp!"

"Cub Scout Pack" vs. "Scout Troop" is the cleanest delineator today, IMHO. When I'm talking with the Cubs, I may say something like "When you're a little older and join a Scout Troop, ..." I'll often refer to the BSA/SA as the "national organization."

Thanks, but I'm not sure that really helps. The BSA moniker is no more, yet we still brand our flagship program as "Scouts BSA?" (never mind the fact that "Scouts BSA" wasn't a particularly strong re-brand to begin with).

In defense of those parents, I don't think the BSA (SA?) has done a particularly good job of branding itself in the public sphere, considering those of us closer to the program still struggle. I still do not know how to refer to the classic Scouting program formerly for boys ages 11-18. We used to distinguish between "Cub Scouts" and "Boy Scouts." Then it was "Cub Scouts" and "Scouts BSA." Now, I guess it would be "Cub Scouts" and just "Scouts?" That's confusing because Cub Scouts are also Scouts, are they not?

If I could wave a magic wand, I would: Shorten the Cub Scout program by moving 5th graders to the traditional Scouting program. Webelos then becomes the transition / capstone year after Lions, Tigers, Wolves, and Bears. Yes, Kindergartners probably lack the maturity to fit with the rest of the Cubs, but SA will lose youth to other programs if they don't recruit kids when they begin elementary school. Keep it simple for the Lions and Tigers. Then layer-on more outdoor activities for the Wolves and Bears. Shorten the traditional Scouting program to grades 5-8. Middle school has traditionally served as the "core" Scouting experience anyway. This cuts down on repetitiveness and helps mitigate the YP issues associated with combining children of wide age ranges (or the expectation that older Scouts "babysit" the younger ones). Combine the resources of the OA and Venturing to create a new Senior Scout program that blends elements of cheerful service, comradery, and outdoor adventure. Each district would sponsor a Senior Scout unit (similar to an OA chapter). Senior Scouts who earned the Life Rank with their troops could continue to work on their Eagle rank until age 18. Create a limited set of Senior Scout awards to keep the youth with a high need for achievement engaged. Use this pool of Scouts to help staff council and district events (but not free manual labor).

Growing up, there was always a canoe, kayak, and pedal boat at my parents' cabin. Kids were allowed to use them as they pleased. There were no concerns about buddies or life jackets (you had to be a good swimmer, but we used an honor system). When I attended my first Boy Scout summer camp, I was perturbed by the amount of restrictions placed on rowboat and canoes usage. Today, it still seems like a little much (but from a liability standpoint, I get it). That said, I'm shocked the BSA allows motorized watercrafts on property today. The "bronze gods" on the waterfront staff will scream at kids for not kneeling in canoes and yet those same staffers are allowed to pilot torpedoes.

The numbers get worse when you consider how the US population has grown over time. BSA is currently at ~20% of its 1980 membership, but adjusting for the change in population over the last 45 years, it's really about ~14% of its 1980 membership. 1980: Membership = 4.3 million US Population = 223 million % of Population in BSA = 1.9% 1990 Membership = 4.0 million US Population = 248 million % of Population in BSA = 1.6% 2000: Membership = 3.4 million US Population = 282 million % of Population in BSA = 1.2% 2010: Membership = 2.7 million US Population = 311 million % of Population in BSA = 0.9% 2019: Membership = 2.0 million US Population = 334 million % of Population in BSA = 0.6% 2023: Membership = 0.9 million US Population = 339 million % of Population in BSA = 0.3%

I read this twice and I'm still not really sure what it means.

I struggle mightily with the broader inclusion topic. And please, let me clarify, I've been supportive of the membership changes of the past decade. Further, I value decency above all else. Yet we try so hard to not offend and accommodate everyone (particularly a small number of boys with behavioral issues) that it weakens the program for the boys that have traditionally benefited from it. Then we wonder why membership has dropped from 3 million to 1 million over the last 20 years and we resolve to be even more inclusive.

I've recently been doing some planning for my son's Wolf Den and am finding that I appreciate the streamlined requirements. It will make our Den meetings a little more open-ended and allow me to tailor them to the kids' interests and the activities available in our region. Further, since there is overlap year-over-year, we may dedicate some Pack meetings to addressing requirements for all grades. This should help weaker Packs who lack suitable Den Leaders - now they can lean more heavily on the leaders who have been keeping the program alive. My only gripe (and it's a big one): The program is just too long. 6 years of Cubs is a lot. They should have used the re-vamp to push 5th graders to Scouts BSA and make the 4th Grade Webelos program the capstone / transition year. The kids like identifying with an animal and color every year, but we lose a little branding polish when we switch to "Webelos" and then "AOL."

Speaking of legal issues, this story popped up in multiple news feeds this past week. The boy was on a jet ski and was struck by another jet ski owned by the local scout council and operated by a camp staffer. Very sad. Tennessee parents sue Boy Scouts after death of 10-year-old son (usatoday.com)

We need to re-think the current council camp model and that process should extend beyond "well, we really need to sell this camp so we can put in new flush toilets and a welcome center at our other camp." Since my son joined Cubs a few years ago, I've started to favor the idea of smaller camps that are close to each council's population center(s). They wouldn't require major facilities - just a single multi-purpose office / health lodge / storm shelter. Kids' don't need a lot to be happy. Get them outside and let their imaginations take over. It will be much easier to recruit volunteers to staff weekend programs when they don't have to drive 2 hours to get to camp. Youth participation would likely increase if a mother could drop off her child at Scouts on her way to Target.

Are we really talking about trading a 1,300-acre camp for 8 shower houses?